The capability approach constitutes a significant contribution to social theory but its potential is diminished by its insufficient treatment of the social construction of meaning. Social meanings enable people to make value judgements about what they will do and be, and also to evaluate how satisfied they are about what they are able to achieve. From this viewpoint, a person’s state of wellbeing must be understood as being socially and psychologically co-constituted in specific social and cultural contexts. In this light, the telos of ‘living well’ which is at the heart of Sen’s version of the capability approach is inadequate and must be modified to a telos of ‘living well together’ which includes consideration of the social structures and institutions which enable people to pursue individual freedoms in relation to others.

Currently the capability approach does not sufficiently or consistently take account of the social, and therefore political, nature of human wellbeing. Despite Sen’s desire to argue away from the oppression of contemporary orthodox economics, the capability approach has, as yet, to fully benefit from better integrated contributions from sociology, social anthropology and political science. This leads to an uneven account of the role of power, in all its forms, in its approach to the construction of human wellbeing.